The debate is late, but necessary

Judging by his news conference on Friday, President Bush is growing impatient with delays in Congress, especially the Senate, in considering administration-proposed legislation to codify just how U.S. troops and other agents should treat prisoners and detainees in the "war on terror." This debate, however, is a healthy one. Republican Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham and John Warner are doing the country a service by prolonging it.

What precipitated the current showdown was the Supreme Court decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that people detained in current conflicts are covered by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions on acceptable wartime conduct. That article bans "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." Under Hamdan those detained at the Guantanamo naval base in Cuba are entitled to be charged and tried, by military tribunals or commissions set up by Congress, not just the executive branch.

The administration and its supporters note that "outrages upon personal dignity" is not as specific as one might prefer and could be interpreted to ban the kind of "aggressive interrogation" the president claims has yielded invaluable information in the struggle against al-Qaida and other jihadists and terrorists. Since the United States passed a War Crimes Act in 1994 that made violations of the Geneva Conventions by U.S. government employees a crime, administration supporters are concerned that CIA employees who use aggressive methods might be criminally liable.

Although administration legislation is billed as clarification, it's still not clear whether "rendition" of detainees to countries with "relaxed" human-rights standards would be permissible. Nor is it clear whether specific techniques like induced hypothermia - standing naked in near-freezing temperatures and being doused with cold water - being forced to remain in uncomfortable positions for up to 40 hours, sleep deprivation or "water boarding" - an ancient technique designed to make the prisoner believe he is drowning - would be permitted.

Critics argue that the president's preferred clarification, in the form of a bill authorizing military commissions, includes aspects the Supreme Court has already decided are abusive, including using secret or classified information the defendant would not be allowed to know about in trials of detainees.

The Senate Armed Service Committee on Thursday passed an alternative proposal pushed by committee chairman Warner of Virginia along with South Carolina's Graham and Arizona's McCain. Sen. Warner, a World War II Navy vet, has long been close to active-duty military officers. Sen. Graham is a former military lawyer and Sen. McCain experienced torture at the hands of the North Vietnamese when he was held captive during the Vietnam war.

The military experience of these three is significant. The U.S. Army has just issued a revised field manual that outlines what interrogation techniques are acceptable, which doesn't include tactics some call torture and some deem indispensable.

Most military people - former Secretary of State and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Colin Powell, as well as Reagan Secretary of State George Shultz, who support the Warner-Graham-McCain position - believe that abiding by the Geneva Conventions strictly protects U.S. service personnel who may be captured in future wars. They acknowledge that terrorists may not be impressed or restrained, but they say they are looking at the long term, assuming that the future will include more conventional wars against established nation-states.

If the military doesn't believe interrogation tactics on the borderline between aggressiveness and torture are necessary, their opinion should carry significant weight. In addition, using secret information a defendant is not allowed to see or challenge in a trial is an affront to American ideals of justice.

Sens. Warner, Graham and McCain have raised issues worthy of continued discussion. There is no need (beyond partisan political needs) to decide the issue this week or this month. Let the discussion continue.

WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Letters to the Editor: E-mail to letters@ocregister.com.
Please provide your name, city and telephone number (telephone numbers will not be published).
Letters of about 200 words or videos of 30-seconds
each will be given preference. Letters will be edited for length, grammar and clarity.

User Agreement

Keep it civil and stay on topic. No profanity, vulgarity, racial
slurs or personal attacks. People who harass others or joke about
tragedies will be blocked. By posting your comment, you agree to
allow Orange County Register Communications, Inc. the right to
republish your name and comment in additional Register publications
without any notification or payment.